Recommended Posts

I keep hearing about Labour in-fighting and it supposedly tearing itself apart but the reality is that the only voices I hear are coming from the Tory press and the Blairite wing of the party. Absolutely none of it is coming from either the left or centre of the party. Blair himself, with some astonishingly awful comments, followed by John McTernan and Alan Milburn amongst others - they are the only ones bitching and moaning and talking about splits and decades in the wilderness. All egged on, of course, by those who wish to damage the party.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

I keep hearing about Labour in-fighting and it supposedly tearing itself apart but the reality is that the only voices I hear are coming from the Tory press and the Blairite wing of the party. Absolutely none of it is coming from either the left or centre of the party. Blair himself, with some astonishingly awful comments, followed by John McTernan and Alan Milburn amongst others - they are the only ones bitching and moaning and talking about splits and decades in the wilderness. All egged on, of course, by those who wish to damage the party.

Twas ever thus. It's always been the right of the party that has created disharmony and splits.

Mr Drake's not wrong. Yes, there is a certain amount of window dressing (slipping slowly away day by day I'd say), but at heart the Tory party is the party of the privileged few. Always has been and always will be. And that's not just my view. If you doubt me try reading something like Alan Clark's diaries. He often spoke about the real power base of the Tory party and it wasn't necessarily it's leading politicians. In fact in many ways they were just puppets. Even he, a man who lived in a castle, was schooled at Eton and Oxford and served in the guards regarded himself as something of a commoner amongst the real Tory party leaders.

"it is a well known fact that those people who most want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it."

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Your flawed analysis, interpretation and conclusion is most definitely and consistently wrong.

How is my analysis flawed and wrong? You came out with the plainly ridiculous statement "the undeniable truth that its people, its policies and its presentation hold no appeal for the electorate."

I showed statistics that prove that 30.4%, just 6.5% of the electorate who voted fewer than the Tories, do in fact find its people, its policies and its presentation do hold appeal for the electorate. And furthermore the Labour party was more appealing 1.5% more of the electorate who voted in 2015 than in 2010.

"it is a well known fact that those people who most want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it."

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Mr Drake's not wrong. Yes, there is a certain amount of window dressing (slipping slowly away day by day I'd say), but at heart the Tory party is the party of the privileged few. Always has been and always will be. And that's not just my view. If you doubt me try reading something like Alan Clark's diaries. He often spoke about the real power base of the Tory party and it wasn't necessarily it's leading politicians. In fact in many ways they were just puppets. Even he, a man who lived in a castle, was schooled at Eton and Oxford and served in the guards regarded himself as something of a commoner amongst the real Tory party leaders.

Presumably, according to the election figures you helpfully posted above, the "privileged few" extends to 36.9% of the electorate.

That's a lot of privileged people.

And they are the real power base of the Tory party, not some shadowy figures in the background, regardless of what Alan Clark might have written.

Unless and until the Labour Party is able to analyse exactly why the Tories were so successful in May, with some realistic rather than wishful thinking, they will struggle to turn back the tide.

I read that Corbyn has got the young all excited with his statements,no wonder its his spend and worry about it later attitude.As ive stated previously this is the norm with the younger ones

Dont forget in the early eighties this guy was basically alligned with the militant tendancy(good mates with Degsy Hatton and co)Ive noticed he's toned down his rhetoric since being nominated(previously he was side by side with the commons village idiot Dennis Skinner)

Anyway if the Socialist party want to commit Hari Kari vote Corbyn(hope he does its cost me £30 so far)

Thankfully the electorate dont vote for left wing policies similarly to when Worsel Gummidge or the Welsh Windbag were in charge

With the best, thats a good bit of PR, though I would say the Bedford team, theres, like, you know, 13 blokes who can get together at the weekend to have a game together, which doesnt point to expansion of the game. Point, yeah go on!

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Perhaps, but what exactly makes Charlotte Church a noteable political commentator ? Am I missing something as to why her view is important ?

It's not that she's a world leader, established commentator or anything like that, it's just an opinion that's resonating with more than a few. The Tories and Blairites are getting their knickers in a twist about Corbyn but he's saying mainly the right things with the right tone to a group of disaffected people who are listening. He's effectively the left-wing version of Nigel Farage, a very polarising figure who will persuade people to vote for him for reasons the centrists just don't get.

Bluntly put, I'd be happier voting for Corbyn than any of the other three given his current views but I do recognise that he's not going to capture the precious centre ground and he's going to be persistently in the media crosshairs. That means he'll make Labour unwinnable unless he can somehow target the very large pool of disaffected people who don't vote.

Also, in a way, Corbyn will get it worse than Michael Foot because of the pervasiveness of modern media, including social media, means the big media companies get a power and influence position they could only dream of 30 years ago.

"When in deadly danger, when beset by doubt; run in little circles, wave your arms and shout"

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

It's not that she's a world leader, established commentator or anything like that, it's just an opinion that's resonating with more than a few. The Tories and Blairites are getting their knickers in a twist about Corbyn but he's saying mainly the right things with the right tone to a group of disaffected people who are listening. He's effectively the left-wing version of Nigel Farage, a very polarising figure who will persuade people to vote for him for reasons the centrists just don't get.

It is with good reason the Scots named Labour the red "Tories".

Bluntly put, I'd be happier voting for Corbyn than any of the other three given his current views but I do recognise that he's not going to capture the precious centre ground and he's going to be persistently in the media crosshairs. That means he'll make Labour unwinnable unless he can somehow target the very large pool of disaffected people who don't vote.

The more austerity bites the bigger the pool of disaffected voters become so if Corbyn has a strategy to go after these votes it will be interesting to see how he manages that. Inequality will be the Tories undoing, it always is but the question is how long it will take?

Also, in a way, Corbyn will get it worse than Michael Foot because of the pervasiveness of modern media, including social media, means the big media companies get a power and influence position they could only dream of 30 years ago.

The big media companies do not yet own the internet. This does mean that Labour maybe better focussing on social media.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

The big media companies do not yet own the internet. This does mean that Labour maybe better focussing on social media.

Social media tends to be an echo chamber. You preach to the converted.

With the best, thats a good bit of PR, though I would say the Bedford team, theres, like, you know, 13 blokes who can get together at the weekend to have a game together, which doesnt point to expansion of the game. Point, yeah go on!

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

This only applies to the BBC as a public service broadcaster, all the others are free to push whatever political agenda their paymesters want them to (though I think there are some rules for the other terrestrial broadcasters on ITC,CH4 and CH5 ?).

Cable & sattelite companies can do what they like as people can choose not to subscribe & watch them.

Don't think so. If this were the case I've no doubt Rupert would have a British version of the ultra right wing Fox News on here. Sky's bias is very subtle, but it's there notheless.

“Few thought him even a starter.There were many who thought themselves smarter. But he ended PM, CH and OM. An Earl and a Knight of the Garter.”

Clement Attlee.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

The more austerity bites the bigger the pool of disaffected voters become so if Corbyn has a strategy to go after these votes it will be interesting to see how he manages that. Inequality will be the Tories undoing, it always is but the question is how long it will take?

Yes, but ...

I don't think it is simple inequality that counts here because most of those on the wrong side of the inequality divide are still (in global terms, at least) quite well off. It will take much more inequality before voting numbers change enough to boot the Tories out.

Rethymno Rugby League Appreciation Society

Founder (and, so far, only) member.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

It's not that she's a world leader, established commentator or anything like that, it's just an opinion that's resonating with more than a few. The Tories and Blairites are getting their knickers in a twist about Corbyn but he's saying mainly the right things with the right tone to a group of disaffected people who are listening. He's effectively the left-wing version of Nigel Farage, a very polarising figure who will persuade people to vote for him for reasons the centrists just don't get.

You should have put in your opinion

Shes entitled to her opinion but IMO its severely flawed

As for the tories being worried by Corbyn behave,its like all their Xmas's came true.

Tories are signing up to vote for him,even his mates at the Communist Party(remember Jezzer writes a column for the Morning Star) have told their comrades to sign up to get him in.

Trouble is for you socialists is that of the 4 candidates on offer,2 are clones of Ed Milliband (Cooper and Burnham) which the electorate have already kicked in to touch,Corbyn is at best a left winger who is un-electable and Kendall who's tarred with Blair.

Share on other sites

As for the tories being worried by Corbyn behave,its like all their Xmas's came true.

Tories are signing up to vote for him,even his mates at the Communist Party(remember Jezzer writes a column for the Morning Star) have told their comrades to sign up to get him in.

Trouble is for you socialists is that of the 4 candidates on offer,2 are clones of Ed Milliband (Cooper and Burnham) which the electorate have already kicked in to touch,Corbyn is at best a left winger who is un-electable and Kendall who's tarred with Blair.

Labour need to move centre right not full left,its suicide

Erm... No. We have a right-wing party in power, we don't need a right-wing opposition. That's not representative of society.

"When in deadly danger, when beset by doubt; run in little circles, wave your arms and shout"

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

The last 2 elections should give you a clue,even a mild leftish oppositon was rejected

Britain( well lets forget the scots their on their own as far as English people are concerned)will not go socialist or in Corbyns case semi communist

Blair even had to change the name to "New Labour"and drop the socialist logo to get elected

1997 to 2010. Four elections in a row that a right wing Tory party were rejected. Remember, Cameron didn't get a majority in 2010 despite going up against one of the most unlikeable PMs for a long time and in a deep recession.

Even now, Cameron only has a bare-bones 12 seat majority. That's it. The smallest single party government majority since 1974 and the smallest Tory government majority this side of World War 2. Not exactly a ringing endorsement of the Tories, is it?

To take your words, the last two elections should give you a clue, even a Tory party going against one of the most disorganised Labour election campaigns since 1983 barely got a 12 seat majority.

We're also only a few elections away from Labour securing back-to-back majorities on very left-wing policies in 1997 and 2001. And those majorities were the highest since 1918. Even 2005, a hugely unpopular Labour lost a lot of core vote and still got a majority over 5 times that of the current government. Yet we have patronising Tories trying to tell us that left wing policies are dead.

But then, let's not let facts get in the way of prejudice.

"When in deadly danger, when beset by doubt; run in little circles, wave your arms and shout"